Seriously, aside from stealing a presidential election (maybe 2), lying about WMDs in order to start a war, revealing the identity of a covert federal agent as a means of political payback, trying to suppress voter turnout in key Democratic regions, countless bribery offenses, and the occasional cheating on taxes, what proof do we have that the Republican Party is capable of such nefarious behavior?

If the corporate media isn't going to discuss him lying his ass off all night I rather doubt they'll be interested in talking about him cheating so it doesn't really matter. All the low information voters need to know is Romney kicked Obama's ass and that is all the corporate media is telling them.

Antimatter:lennavan: Antimatter: Wow, a lot of deflection from the conservatives here.

What did he put on the podium, that's what we need to know. If it's notes, then he broke the rules and the press should grill his ass over it.

Where was Obama born? That's what we need to know. If he was born in Kenya, he is ineligible for president and the press should grill his ass over it.

Hawaii, see his long form and short form birth certificates.

There is actual video of Romney using the farking handkerchief. This is equivalent to actual video of Obama being pushed out of his mom's cooch with the state of Hawaii seal on the wall and surfers and volcanoes and shiat out the window in the background.

This is how stupid you sound. Please stop. I'm an Obama supporter and the conservatives are going to lump me in with idiots like you.

This is about as stupid as the Birthers. Do you really think a canidate for the POTUS would blatently cheat during a debate with a world audience watching their ever move and word coming out of their mouth? Everything they did was scipted and practiced with attention paid to every detail to ensure no mistakes would be made.

Yes, this would be about on par with thinking Democrats would not bother to check if a man representing the Democrats and running for president was in fact a born US citizen qualified to run for president.

The handkerchief contained his notes and was rather obviously used as an alibi for later when he got caught.Who the hell takes a HEAVY handkerchief out of their pocket and tosses it on the podium as soon as they get there?When he tossed it onto the podium it landed like a deck of cards wrapped in .... a handkerchief.

Anyone else would have left it in their pocket , reached into their pocket when they "needed" it, wiped their face, blew their nose, whatever, then put it back in the pocket.Nobody puts a handkerchief out on the podium in advance.Unless they want to hide something in it.

Pichu0102:This bears repeating. Having pre-made notes during a debate strikes me as good preparation, especially since you have to still work within a changing debate.

The point is you shouldn't need notes, it's a chance to demonstrate clear mastery of the material. It's amazingly telling when someone does not know without notes, I'll give you two examples:

Stephen Colbert asked a politician who was advocating putting the 10 commandments in courthouses because they are so important "name the 10 commandments." When he didn't know, it was amazingly telling exactly how important he really thought they were.

Another example is in discussing the minimum wage, many Republicans have advocated there is no need to raise the minimum wage. So when asked "what is the minimum wage" it became amazingly clear they had no idea.

In both of these cases, failure to be able to recite basic facts off the top of their head was incredibly relevant.

You gotta love the left's flailing around trying to figure out why Fartbongo got his ass kicked. It's simple. He hasn't had to face anybody tough in years. He got soft, he lost his edge. He became complacent. He's been told he's the greatest thing for so long that he began to believe that he was the best there is. And then holy shiat what the hell is this a tough SOB?

It reminded me of the pigs from Demolition Man: "We're police officers! We're not trained to handle this kind of violence! "

Maybe next time he'll prep for the debate. I'm not sure why though, anybody who's not faking it at their job can talk shop at the drop of a hat.

Oh, sorry I must have missed the Republicans running around crying about paranoid delusional conspiracies trying to make up for the fact that their candidate had his a-- royally handed to him in front of millions across this globe.

/// back to your teleprompter fool.

Yes, if our standards for a debate win are taken from Idiocracy, then Obama got his "ass royally handed to him".

i'm surprised at how many of you are thinking about this so linearly. why couldn't he have thrown both his notes AND a handkerchief on the table? then he's got his notes to read and a handkerchief to cover them up/use to make it seem normal. or he could've just written the notes onto the handkerchief itself. it's like you guys have never cheated in school before.

Did anyone notice that a 90-minute exchange of talking points doesn't matter at all?

That you can't get an in-depth, fact-checked explanation of complex issues in 90 minutes of banter?

That the President of the United States has rarely, if ever, been required to use off-the-cuff debate as part of his job duties?

That this was basically futility in action, and if you're really interested in what a President will do, you have to do some real work to understand the basis and outcome of the policies they propose and their track record?

Executive policy proposals and implementations have nothing to do with battles of wits or memorized talking points. They come from working with committees and commissions, working with experts, and making complicated written plans.

Our guy didn't do well on Wednesday; we need to move on move on. If we're going to spin this thing could we please stick with the Mendacious Mitt or Honest Mitt's Used Cars narratives, please. This whole "Mitt took notes to the debate" conspiracy gets us nowhere and makes us look like idiots.

I don't care for Romney, and I generally feel that Republican politicians are more likely to lie, cheat, distort facts, and manipulate voters than Democratic ones. So I especially hate it when liberals jump on something like this and declare it true without the facts. It's fine that the question was raised; if he did cheat, that would be a character issue if nothing else, but credible analysts were saying handkerchief, and he used it later in the debate. To keep saying it was notes is to be like the climate change deniers, who ignore the credible evidence and hang on the lunatic fringe.

Remember the Daily Kos? in 2008 they were telling everyone they owned the party and they were having their asses kissed left and right. four years later with the bloom off the rose you never hear from these fools and when you do its this kind of crap that ranks as their fine work product. Pathetic.

The guy "won" a debate by burying his competitor in such a pile of lies, mistruths and strawmen that he had no hope of knocking them all down and still getting a word in edgewise.Who gives a fark what mechanics were in play? The strategy itself is such an incredibly cowardly, intellectually dishonest, meta, bush-league move, and shows such incredible contempt for the audience (in assuming we're all to stupid to notice or too invested in political team affiliation to care) that I really don't think there's any 'secret' to uncover that could make his performance *worse*.

lennavan:I mean I thought Romney was a bit better but if the best the left has is handkerchiefgate, then apparently Romney wiped the floor with Obama.

Meh. This is a post on DailyKos. Neither the Obama campaign, nor the Democratic Party, nor any major figure on "the left" has made a big deal out of this. They've focused instead on what is verifiable.

I haven't looked, but I also haven't seen a thread for the unemployment numbers that were released today, that favor Obama. Remember: the mods here select the daily Fark discussion issues. Not "the left" or any institutional figures on the left.

badaboom:mrshowrules: For everyone arguing that the the hanky was too bulky, obviously you don't know what 4,000 threadcount Armani custom hankerchief, made with Burmese albino spider silk cleansed in the tears of children orphaned by parents who died because they lost their health care due to their jobs being outsourced by Bain Capital, weighs.

Dollars Bain capital cost you and your grandchildren: $0

Dollars Obama cost you and your grandchildren: $4 trillion

Not really. I'm Canadian and because of bank regulation and moderate Federal tax increases, our budget will be balanced by 2016/2017. However, Bain Capital did move quite a few jobs north of the border so from my perspective they are a job creator. Thanks Romney. Canadians would also like to sell oil to China so please get that Keystone pipeline built for us ASAP. We don't want that dirty shiat running across our country.

well, after 4 years of secret muslim, birth certificate, communist, fascist and everything else obama is being called, is it really that far of a stretch for the left to question what that was? if it was obama it would be on the front page of every single blog and it would be another "you didnt build this" debacle

mrshowrules:For everyone arguing that the the hanky was too bulky, obviously you don't know what 4,000 threadcount Armani custom hankerchief, made with Burmese albino spider silk cleansed in the tears of children orphaned by parents who died because they lost their health care due to their jobs being outsourced by Bain Capital, weighs.

The My Little Pony Killer:You know, of all the things to take offense at about this last debate, we focus on what Mitt put on the podium before it began rather than the lies he told during. He's nailed it, alright.

One man on the stage was looking down at his podium all night. It wasn't Romney.

This isn't a "gotcha" for the left, it's a pathetic reach that only resounds in the echo chamber. Obama clearly didn't bring his A game and will bring it next time because his second term is riding on it.

sure haven't:ShadowLAnCeR: yes because we can totally trust something coming from the democratic underground. That is not biased and does not have an agenda at all.

You're right, they used computer graphics to fake the video.

Did you even watch it? There is 100% no denying he tried to discreetly pull paper out of his pocket.

Bill Frist:Pichu0102: Nightsweat: Who cares? Both candidates should have notes.

This bears repeating. Having pre-made notes during a debate strikes me as good preparation, especially since you have to still work within a changing debate.Romney is a grand asshole for many reasons. This is not one.

well its bullshiat if he gets notes and Obama doesn't, but I agree that I don't see why candidates can't have some notes.

cameroncrazy1984:lennavan: cameroncrazy1984: lennavan: No, subby I did not notice that because I saw Romney take notes many times. But even if the way you totally imagined the debate went were true, I fail to see how a handkerchief explains it.

Why would Romney put a handkerchief on the podium? Why not just keep it in his pocket? Is he expecting some sort of snot-emergency wherein he'll need to save time?

Holy fark who cares why he put it on a podium versus kept it in his pocket. Do you? Are you seriously concerned about the location of Mitt Romney's handkerchief?

You don't think it's seriously weird that Romney put a handkerchief on the podium before the debate? Who does that?

OH SH*T it's part of his programming!

You know what, I'm not up on the current ettiquite for handling of your own handkerchief, what is socially acceptable and what is seriously weird and all. You know why? Because I could give a flying fark. Apparently this is an important part of your day, keeping up on what is acceptable use and location of your handkerchief.

But let me entertain your line of derp for a moment and pretend like this is the most pressing and important issue and line of attack on Romney - Mitt Romney puts his handkerchief on the podium before the debate. So that's one person who does it. Now here's my question - who DOESN'T put their handkerchief on the podium before the debate?

Right now, I've got 1 person who puts a handkerchief on the podium before the debate and you've got zero people who do not. I await your incredibly informed response because I know this is a pressing issue for you.

Romney WAS taking notes during the debate. Either that or he was jerking off. I remember seeingthe mic on the podium jiggling quite a bit.

I'm betting it was note taking, though because if he was jerking off then BO would have had to whipHIS out and the damn podium would have fallen over (you know, because black men...somethingsomething penis size).

In all seriousness (sorta?) though, he CLEARLY put something on the podium but nobody knows ifit was pre-written notes or not. Maybe the man is just more comfortable reading off of note cardsthan a piece of paper so that's what he took his notes on.

My oldest son is the same way. Give him something on a piece of paper to read and its painful tolisten to. Put them on note cards though and he turns into a GOT damn orator. Maybe having thecards in his hand to shuffle through relaxes him or something...I don't know.

cameroncrazy1984:lennavan: No, subby I did not notice that because I saw Romney take notes many times. But even if the way you totally imagined the debate went were true, I fail to see how a handkerchief explains it.

Why would Romney put a handkerchief on the podium? Why not just keep it in his pocket? Is he expecting some sort of snot-emergency wherein he'll need to save time?

Holy fark who cares why he put it on a podium versus kept it in his pocket. Do you? Are you seriously concerned about the location of Mitt Romney's handkerchief?

Via Infinito:Quasar: Is this like how Bush (or was it McCain) must have had an earpiece?

No this is more straight forward. He clearly took paper out of his pocket and put it on the podium.

There's another video that shows him going back to the podium later and collecting all his papers before he leaves.Not that it's particularly suspicious, but we can't leave our crib notes on the podium, now can we?

that's far from conclusive. the paper he picked up at the end looked a lot larger then what he pulled out in the beginning.

why would you put a handkerchief on the table before you need to use it? has Mitt ever made a speech in which he dropped a handkerchief on the podium before he began to speak? Why did he use the handkerchief?

It makes a lot of sense that his notes were concealed inside the handkerchief, and that his ostentatious use of the handkerchief was a very good alibi.

As for those who suggest why would he do this if he might get caught, the answer is that he didn't get caught, he got away with it because it was a real smooth cheat.

It's pretty obvious he smuggled notes, and I give props to Mitt on how he did it. It's a smooth cheat and in my book, if you don't get caught, then I won't accuse you of anything. Well played Mitt.

Let's see if Mitt tries to run the same one again. In my experience cheats will continue running the same cheat if it worked once before.

And it's not like Mitt needs notes, but cheaters get a certain thrill in breaking the rules, I don't pretend to understand, but I know they can't help themselves from doing it. Mitt won the debate fair and square, and he may or may have not cheated, but if he did cheat, it was done smooth the way you are supposed to do it.

MacWizard:Didn't read many of the posts in this thread, but here is my take:

Assuming for just a moment that it was actually notes that Mitt took out of his pocket and not the handkerchief that it obviously was, what did these notes say? "Remember to refute everything you've said in your entire campaign"? "Medicare savings are really cuts"? "Rate reductions are not tax cuts"? "You don't like the federal government and that's why you want to run it"? "You like teachers this week"? "When asked for specifics, reiterate your five vague talking points"? "Don't stop talking when your time is up"?

If anything it would have been index cards with specific points wrapped in a hanky. Do I think he did that? .... I wouldn't put it past him at all. Am I saying he did that? No. The cards would be nothing but his zingers, stats and talking points. Do I care? Well.... I wouldn't like the integrity of the horse and pony show to be breached any more than it already is. Does my opinion matter? Not in the least...

Notes or not. I can't stand the way he talks. It's like a bad nightmare from my childhood. If you aren't Mormon or have never been to a Mormon church you might not catch it. But he speaks with a smug cadence that is unmistakably they way Mormon authorities speak. It's like listening to what they call General Conference. Bishop Romney isn't running for President, he's running to get a place in the general authorities. (look it up)/he was a Mormon Bishop so he's still Bishop Romney to a lot of people//never question an elder

Assuming for just a moment that it was actually notes that Mitt took out of his pocket and not the handkerchief that it obviously was, what did these notes say? "Remember to refute everything you've said in your entire campaign"? "Medicare savings are really cuts"? "Rate reductions are not tax cuts"? "You don't like the federal government and that's why you want to run it"? "You like teachers this week"? "When asked for specifics, reiterate your five vague talking points"? "Don't stop talking when your time is up"?

badaboom: Red_Fox: Via Infinito: Is it really a stretch to realize that he's also a cheating sack of shiat?

I just assume that every super rich 'captain of industry' is a lying cheating douchebag.

You do realize that is the same exact thought process racists and homophobes have, right?

No it isn`t. Judging someone for their actions is not the same as judging someone for parts of themselves that they cannot change. Twat.

NateGrey: The poorly educated where never supposed to vote because they where not sophisticated enough

where?

lennavan: Clearly you're not exactly MENSA material, are you?

I`m in Mensa, and I think notes can be in things you know?

Having one thing does not prove you don`t have another thing. Sort of like a cover, or smokescreen to give a boring and ordinary thing for people to say `that`s what it was` when they see you get something out of your pocket.

Do you think that it`s important to not show paper from your pocket? how to work this... I know! Put it in a hankie!

without being there, there is no way to prove either way.

Continue your wanky derpfest fark.

PsiChick: Typing ITS NOT A FARKING CHEAT SHEET is neither evidence nor even mildly convincing. It just makes me laugh harder.

Just read this after typing above. This makes me laugh.

We can laugh at them together ;)

[omsmedia.com image 430x278]

Being rich is an action?

Here is a simple one for you: Can a rich person be as moral and virtuous as a poor person? And the corollary, is every poor person moral?

badaboom:Sorry we were talking about broken promises. A broken promise is a broken promise.

Well, he did everything in his power to close down the prison at Guantanamo Bay.

Congress actively blocked him every step of the way. Most recently Section 1028 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 ()Link explicitly prohibits prisoners from Guantanamo Bay being transferred to the United States. Unless we have another overseas prison to keep them at (which defeats the purpose), we can't close Gitmo.

Can't fault a man for doing everything he could to fill a promise, but be cut off legally from doing so by the other party. Odd, the President tries to accomplish his campaign promise, is thwarted by the Republicans, then the Republicans try to say he's a bad President for not completing his promise.

You want us to believe that Obama was at fault for not magically making Congress approve the shutdown?

vrax:badaboom: vrax: badaboom: chatikh: I don't understand why all the media is saying Romney won the debate. He made lots and lots of claims, but I didn't believe any of it because he couldn't answer the simple question, "How?" Saying you can magically fix the economy but not answering how you're going to magically fix the economy isn't winning. Because I really think he either doesn't know how or he is completely lying about it.

As opposed to what Obama said? What did Obama say that impressed you?

Obama's performance wasn't impressive. In his attempt to remain mostly on the side of fact he couldn't quite compete with the bullshiat explosion coming from Romney. Maybe he should have guaranteed that he'd pay off every mortgage in the US, have a military base on Mars, and cure cancer by 2014 if elected. With that immense level of BS he'd have won the debate for sure!

Um, this is the same President that promised to insure 30 million more people AND save money. Obama runs on promises he knows he can not keep. . He couldn't even close Gitmo. How would he get a base on Mars?

Just like Romney, and the Cylons, he has a plan!

Did you really bring up Gitmo as Obama's fault?! Wow!

Sorry we were talking about broken promises. A broken promise is a broken promise.

vrax:badaboom: chatikh: I don't understand why all the media is saying Romney won the debate. He made lots and lots of claims, but I didn't believe any of it because he couldn't answer the simple question, "How?" Saying you can magically fix the economy but not answering how you're going to magically fix the economy isn't winning. Because I really think he either doesn't know how or he is completely lying about it.

As opposed to what Obama said? What did Obama say that impressed you?

Obama's performance wasn't impressive. In his attempt to remain mostly on the side of fact he couldn't quite compete with the bullshiat explosion coming from Romney. Maybe he should have guaranteed that he'd pay off every mortgage in the US, have a military base on Mars, and cure cancer by 2014 if elected. With that immense level of BS he'd have won the debate for sure!

Um, this is the same President that promised to insure 30 million more people AND save money. Obama runs on promises he knows he can not keep. . He couldn't even close Gitmo. How would he get a base on Mars?

Oh, sorry I must have missed the Republicans running around crying about paranoid delusional conspiracies trying to make up for the fact that their candidate had his a-- royally handed to him in front of millions across this globe.

/// back to your teleprompter fool.

Yes, if our standards for a debate win are taken from Idiocracy, then Obama got his "ass royally handed to him".

What did Obama say that impressed you?

OK, what impressed me is that Obama didn't just come right out and say "What The Fark?!".

badaboom:chatikh: I don't understand why all the media is saying Romney won the debate. He made lots and lots of claims, but I didn't believe any of it because he couldn't answer the simple question, "How?" Saying you can magically fix the economy but not answering how you're going to magically fix the economy isn't winning. Because I really think he either doesn't know how or he is completely lying about it.

As opposed to what Obama said? What did Obama say that impressed you?

Obama's performance wasn't impressive. In his attempt to remain mostly on the side of fact he couldn't quite compete with the bullshiat explosion coming from Romney. Maybe he should have guaranteed that he'd pay off every mortgage in the US, have a military base on Mars, and cure cancer by 2014 if elected. With that immense level of BS he'd have won the debate for sure!

badaboom:chatikh: I don't understand why all the media is saying Romney won the debate. He made lots and lots of claims, but I didn't believe any of it because he couldn't answer the simple question, "How?" Saying you can magically fix the economy but not answering how you're going to magically fix the economy isn't winning. Because I really think he either doesn't know how or he is completely lying about it.

As opposed to what Obama said? What did Obama say that impressed you?

I was impressed when Romney said that the oil subsidies have been going on for 100 years and Obama cut in with "that's long enough, time to end it" something like that. When Obama summarized Romney's unexpected platform change as "nevermind". Or how about when Obama summarized how disconnect Romney was from the plight of students when he suggest that they could just borrow money from their parents. Or how about challenging the moderator on the term "entitlements" like it made people sound like leeches. You put the debate on paper and Obama kicked ass. Turn the sound off and Romney wins hands down.

PsiChick: And like I said: Either the dumbass cheated, or looked like he cheated. Thus, I am amused.

You're an idiot. But we established that in a previous thread, didn't we?

Levannan, are you going to do anything here besides see how many variations you can work in of calling me stupid without actually saying anything, or should we just give up and assume you have no recourse here?

welcome to Fark lennavan

that said, thinking that this is anything but a handkerchief is the height of wishful thinking

If your handkechief is hard, square and goes bump on a podium, you might want to wash it.

Never mind me, just sniffing that olde timey mimiograph paper. Reminds me of grade school

chatikh:I don't understand why all the media is saying Romney won the debate. He made lots and lots of claims, but I didn't believe any of it because he couldn't answer the simple question, "How?" Saying you can magically fix the economy but not answering how you're going to magically fix the economy isn't winning. Because I really think he either doesn't know how or he is completely lying about it.

He didn't win shiat! He basically went up there, yelled "San Dimas High School Football Rules!", and all the dolts went, "Hmm, that sounded pretty good!"

PsiChick:lennavan: PsiChick: Typing ITS NOT A FARKING CHEAT SHEET is neither evidence nor even mildly convincing.

Says the person with zero evidence it is a cheat sheet. el oh el.

PsiChick: And like I said: Either the dumbass cheated, or looked like he cheated. Thus, I am amused.

You're an idiot. But we established that in a previous thread, didn't we?

Levannan, are you going to do anything here besides see how many variations you can work in of calling me stupid without actually saying anything, or should we just give up and assume you have no recourse here?

welcome to Farklennavan

that said, thinking that this is anything but a handkerchief is the height of wishful thinking

I don't understand why all the media is saying Romney won the debate. He made lots and lots of claims, but I didn't believe any of it because he couldn't answer the simple question, "How?" Saying you can magically fix the economy but not answering how you're going to magically fix the economy isn't winning. Because I really think he either doesn't know how or he is completely lying about it.

Romney (inhaling deeply from his hanky): "Ah yes, and then there are the death panels. I only want to kill Big Bird. The President wants to kill your grandmother!" "Five trillion what?! Don't you farking look at me!"

PsiChick:He had to do a complete 180 on his positions, and it's not like there's a law saying he can ONLY have a handkerchief OR a notecard.

Again: I really don't give a shiat, the guy was outright lying in the debate. This just amuses me. Either he cheated, or he looked like he was cheating.

Either way, I'm amused.

I wish I could be amused, too. Instead, I am horrified that this guy is THAT close to being the president of our country. My husband and I are jokingly looking at other countries to move to.. sadly, I am only half-joking. If Romney wins and puts four or more SC justices in position, women's rights will be in the toilet. I don't look forward to my daughter and granddaughter becoming adult females in a country where their rights are less than a man's other "possessions." A lot of people think that we have fewer personal freedoms under Obama and it is mind-boggling that they truly believe things will get better, in that respect, under Romney. And a lot of people laugh it off, saying he can't make that big of a difference.. but the ability to appoint FOUR Supreme Court judges? That is handing one person an awful lot of power to decide our futures. A lot of people are willing to put Romney in that position, it is scary. Sadly, a lot of other people, the uneducated, the poor, don't realize what that means to them, they are just listening to the talking points, seeing Obama's skin color and allowing themselves to be swept up into the hype.

Beanlet:PsiChick: No, I just don't find it utterly ridiculous that, yeah, the guy who's hardly MENSA material might need notes and have a handkerchief in his pocket. And while I'm obviously not familiar with the gesturing patterns of white rich males, it's not like putting your handkerchief on the debate table is a universal.

But like I said, I really don't give a flying shiat, so it's a lot easier for me to say 'well, damn, that don't look good'.

imagine this.. Romney is a sweaty old perv.. he needs the handkerchief to keep his palms and forehead from dripping sweat when he's nervous. The bulging eyes, which got redder and redder as the night went on, aren't the only outsider indicator that he was nervous. He wiped his face a few times. I will be honest and admit that I have sweaty palms (I may be old and I may be a perv, too). I keep a tissue in my hand before I am going to shake someone's hand so I don't gross them out. I toss it into the other hand or my pocket in the last moments before I am to shake the hand. He may not have been shaking hands at the podium, but he was definitely sweating up a storm, his upper lip and brow were damp, so I assume his palms were sweaty too. It would be better to have that kerchief on the podium, rather than looking like he was playing pocket pool every time he went for said kerchief.

If he had notes, he sucks at reading them, since he tossed out numbers that we all know aren't correct. He'd have gotten his "zingers" correct, too.. the "you can have your own house, your own plane, but not your own facts" wasn't something he'd have written down, since it applied directly to HIM, not Obama. Most of his "zingers" were like that.. they seemed like he was taunting himself. I'd like to think that's why Obama was looking down at his notes, thinking "wow, this guy has no clue what he's talking about and I am supposed to response with.. what??"

I dislike Romney as much as the next guy/girl.. but making a big deal out of a handkercheif is just ...

I read a lot of 'Is Romney coked up wtf?' comments last night LOL

You can have notes with the 'wrong' information on them, as long as the information is stuff the base already accepts as true. Just keep hammering home the narrative. And then contradict yourself by saying you agree with Mr. President 5 million times in the same debate.

Quantum Romney taunting himself is the norm, not the exception. Case in point: the dance regarding Obamacare/Romneycare.

I'm biased and bigoted: I don't like Romney. I don't like his politics. I don't like his religion. I don't like his lack of an ethical center. I don't like his smirk. I don't like him. I'm more biased than the average nutcase because I started out liking him and defending him, many moons ago -- before he burned his bridges for the resume enhancer at any price. Romney is the equivalent of a straight gay activist jumping on the marriage is between a man and a woman bandwagon because it pays more bills. Romney has no convictions except whatever will keep him in clover with the Quorum back in Salt Lake.

Better to deal with a man who has a strong center but is willing to compromise, over a man who has no center and is all over the place due to chasing dollar signs.

CynicalLA:badaboom: Are you the type of person who turn off the TV in the 8th inning because your team is down a run? Yeesh, your "facts" are dubious. Too bad the President is not selected by USA Today and Gallup. Hopefully guys like you stay home since it's in the bag for Obama.

Obama doing a poor job during the debate still doesn't change the fact that only a piece of shiat would support Romney at this point.

So you are calling nearly 50% of the country pieces of shiat? You are an A-hole.

Beanlet:PsiChick: No, I just don't find it utterly ridiculous that, yeah, the guy who's hardly MENSA material might need notes and have a handkerchief in his pocket. And while I'm obviously not familiar with the gesturing patterns of white rich males, it's not like putting your handkerchief on the debate table is a universal.

But like I said, I really don't give a flying shiat, so it's a lot easier for me to say 'well, damn, that don't look good'.

imagine this.. Romney is a sweaty old perv.. he needs the handkerchief to keep his palms and forehead from dripping sweat when he's nervous. The bulging eyes, which got redder and redder as the night went on, aren't the only outsider indicator that he was nervous. He wiped his face a few times. I will be honest and admit that I have sweaty palms (I may be old and I may be a perv, too). I keep a tissue in my hand before I am going to shake someone's hand so I don't gross them out. I toss it into the other hand or my pocket in the last moments before I am to shake the hand. He may not have been shaking hands at the podium, but he was definitely sweating up a storm, his upper lip and brow were damp, so I assume his palms were sweaty too. It would be better to have that kerchief on the podium, rather than looking like he was playing pocket pool every time he went for said kerchief.

If he had notes, he sucks at reading them, since he tossed out numbers that we all know aren't correct. He'd have gotten his "zingers" correct, too.. the "you can have your own house, your own plane, but not your own facts" wasn't something he'd have written down, since it applied directly to HIM, not Obama. Most of his "zingers" were like that.. they seemed like he was taunting himself. I'd like to think that's why Obama was looking down at his notes, thinking "wow, this guy has no clue what he's talking about and I am supposed to response with.. what??"

I dislike Romney as much as the next guy/girl.. but making a big deal out of a handkercheif ...

He had to do a complete 180 on his positions, and it's not like there's a law saying he can ONLY have a handkerchief OR a notecard.

Again: I really don't give a shiat, the guy was outright lying in the debate. This just amuses me. Either he cheated, or he looked like he was cheating.

I am not known for laughing out loud.. especially not while drinking coffee.. you almost owed me a new keyboard. I inhaled the coffee instead of spitting it though. You owe me a new windpipe and left lung.

lennavan:PsiChick: But like I said, I really don't give a flying shiat, so it's a lot easier for me to say 'well, damn, that don't look good'.

[i.imgur.com image 300x300]

You're right, this looks totally like a cheat sheet and nothing like a handkerchief. It certainly looks bad for Romney.

PsiChick: 's not like putting your handkerchief on the debate table is a universal.

But it's common practice to wipe your face with a cheat sheet. You keep those strong arguments coming.

[i.imgur.com image 300x300]

PsiChick: But like I said, I really don't give a flying shiat

Well of course you don't, now that you've been conclusively shown to be farking stupid.

[i.imgur.com image 300x300]

PsiChick: the guy who's hardly MENSA material

The guy got an MBA from Harvard. Clearly you're not exactly MENSA material, are you?

What happened to dude's Univision tan?

probably was a handkerchief. it was the way he took it out and tossed it on the table that annoyed me. remember that 'nailed it' .jpg? andthe folks voting for Romney call Obama uppity and disrespectful. you know how Obama got called out in some quarters for referring to people in the 45 to 55 age range and how they should be concerned, how he was called disrespectful using the phrasing he did? well, i'm going to use that same card against Romney, for how he took that handkerchief out of his pocket and slam tossed it on the podium.

Some folks are going to be attracted to what he did. I just know, if Obama had done it, it would have been called a gangsta move, and not ina complimentary way.

I agree that the debate was pretty weird.One guy has questionable facts and ethicsThe other guy stood there like he found a dick in his pocket that wasn't his.

It was the first of three debates.It's only a debate.

Nothing changed for me, I'm still voting. These dog and pony shows for the illiterate? They're only handy if you aren't the president and have no record in international anything.Well, except for stepping on your dick when you're in England.

Has no idea why I wasted that hour watching what amounts to a controlled burn.

This text is now purple:...FDR lashed himself to the lecturn to deliver speeches in his day. Nixon looked more animated with a serious case of the flu, and lost the election because he looked poor by comparison.

Face it, if you're seriously running for POTUS, you have no defensible excuse to look disinterested at a debate. All of your job is appearances.

RockofAges:The My Little Pony Killer: Great Janitor: The My Little Pony Killer: Great Janitor: He openly places it on the podium, not caring who sees it. If this was the note cards that so many anti-Romney people want it to be, wouldn't someone during the debate asked about it?

I'm pretty sure the members of the audience directly in front of him would have been able to see it as well, considering he wasn't completely behind the podium when he started pulling it from his pocket.

But, the camera crew saw what he did. So if he were note cards and the camera man saw it, what's stopping him from saying something? If I were the camera guy at a debate and one of the candidates openly threw note cards onto the table, I would be facebooking and tweeting that instantly. I would be known as the guy who clearly caught a presidential candidate cheating. You can't buy that kind of fame.

And since the camera guy hasn't hit twitter and facebook about this yet, what can we conclude?

We can conclude that nobody cares whether or not Romney cheats except for democrats and the slim segment left in society which values ethics and sportsmanship within the realm of intellectual debate over bluster, lies, and rhetorical strongarming.

Further, we can conclude that your strawman cameraman doesn't actually exist as a safeguard, but this video sure does show a pizza-pie firm kerchief bouncing like a deck of cards after being pocketed and slid on top of a lectern in a debate where outside materials are expressly forbidden.

Jesus H Christ people. I had to put something up quick and then add in Lehrer (SINCE HE WASN'T IN THE ORIGINAL GRAPHIC). If you wanna call that racist, call it whatever, but it seems as if you guys are a bit insecure.

cameroncrazy1984:lennavan: No, subby I did not notice that because I saw Romney take notes many times. But even if the way you totally imagined the debate went were true, I fail to see how a handkerchief explains it.

Why would Romney put a handkerchief on the podium? Why not just keep it in his pocket? Is he expecting some sort of snot-emergency wherein he'll need to save time?

So he doesn't look like he's reaching into his pocket on TV all the time? Its less awkward when he wants to quickly wipe away the lie-sweat?

Is this what folks are going with now? This sounds so freaking desperate.

Johnny Swank:I think Romney is a cockbag, but this is a stupid, stupid conspiracy theory. There's 235,239 more things to pound the cult leader with.

This.

I'm sorry, I very highly doubt he cheated. He came prepared. I mean he was full of sh*t, but he came prepared. Obama's lack of emotional delivery and lack of attacks on easy targets was the phenomenon that defined the debate. No one perhaps outside of Obama really knows why, but I think the reason people are shocked is because this is really not the Obama we have seen.

I saw the debates in 2008. Obama was not this passive. He wasn't incredibly aggressive, but he didn't act like a chump on stage. Many people, mostly conservatives, think his passivity was from too much teleprompter, but that is BS, the GOP wants to paint Obama as a weak president, and the teleprompter lies play into it.

I think something else was up. I don't know if it was campaign strategy, off night, personal problems, international problems, what, but he was either distracted or doing it on purpose. He still came off fine to me, a person with a plan and ideas who shared them if boringly. But he didn't blow me away - neither did he do it at the convention. There are clues, like his memoir, that Obama is an introspective person. He might just be a little tired right now. The job runs you down. And there's such hate out there for Obama, mindboggling hate. The economy has been improving steadily month after month. Unemployment is down under 8% now. And yet people are still mad at him, like it's his fault for taking out a bad mortgage or financial chicanery or offshoring jobs.

This country is full of cowards, small people living unimportant lives of quiet desperation who want to blame everyone for their situation except themselves.

I'm kind of tired of theorizing about it. Doesn't affect my vote in the least. I know whose ideas are bankrupt both logically and morally.

I find it ironic that folks will believe that Romney cheated by bringing notes, but refuse to believe that something funny is going on with the employment numbers. It's as if people look at Romney and say "there is NO WAY he could possibly know all that stuff- he must have cheated!" but then look at employment numbers that appear to contradict themselves and act as a HUGE windfall to Obama and say "oh, those are TOTALLY the real numbers. Absolutely accurate! No one in the government has any sort of vested interest in skewing those numbers!"

ringersol:The guy "won" a debate by burying his competitor in such a pile of lies, mistruths and strawmen that he had no hope of knocking them all down and still getting a word in edgewise.Who gives a fark what mechanics were in play? The strategy itself is such an incredibly cowardly, intellectually dishonest, meta, bush-league move, and shows such incredible contempt for the audience (in assuming we're all to stupid to notice or too invested in political team affiliation to care) that I really don't think there's any 'secret' to uncover that could make his performance *worse*.

Standard high school debate technique, we were taught it in debate club. You bomb your opponent with a overload of either lies or half truths that they just don't have time to respond in detail to. Unfortunately this rarely worked in high school because people recognized what you were doing.

Heh. This is a really stupid thing to get worked up over. Still voting for Obama, but he definitely didn't win the debate. Just not a strong showing, which is a shame because Mitt 'won' about as convincingly as the talent portion of a beauty contest. As a debate it was mostly a flop in general, although Obama did at least present some actual content, just not terribly well.

That's because the only conservative sites that ever get linked are complete bullshiat like American Thinker or PJ Media. It's not our fault the right-wingers on this site insist on submitting apoplectic garbage full of lies and massively twisted "logic" instead of finding something reasonable and intelligent.

That's because the only conservative sites that ever get linked are complete bullshiat like American Thinker or PJ Media. It's not our fault the right-wingers on this site insist on submitting apoplectic garbage full of lies and massively twisted "logic" instead of finding something reasonable and intelligent.

This is definitely not the right thread to make fun of right wingers being retarded.

quizzical:This is dumb. Romney has been in politics for years, and he's prepped for debates many times. It's easy to believe that, when everyone said the fate of his campaign was hanging on his performance, he worked hard and had a good night as a result. This whole line of attack makes it seem INCONCEIVABLE that Romney could have a good night without cheating, and that isn't the case.

He's also lied about his residence on his taxes, then lied about his lying about his residence on his taxes, and he's not released his tax returns so as to avoid having to lie yet again...it's weird how many times a proven lying weasel is supposed to given the benefit of a doubt.

1) This is dumb. Romney has been in politics for years, and he's prepped for debates many times. It's easy to believe that, when everyone said the fate of his campaign was hanging on his performance, he worked hard and had a good night as a result. This whole line of attack makes it seem INCONCEIVABLE that Romney could have a good night without cheating, and that isn't the case.

2) Given that Obama wasn't aggressive in his efforts to counter Romney's attacks, the fact that Romney may have had notes doesn't make a damn bit of difference.

The rules - agreed to by both parties - say they can't bring notes to the debate. They can write them during the debate, but they can't bring them in.

No props, notes, charts, diagrams or other writings can be used by the candidates; however, they can take notes on the type of paper of their choosing. The candidates cannot ask each other direct questions, but can ask rhetorical questions. The candidates cannot address each other with proposed pledges. Each candidate can use his own makeup artist. No candidate is allowed to use risers or any other device to make them look taller. The Coin Toss: At least 72 hours before the first debate, there will be a coin toss on the order of questioning and closing arguments.

AGREED. I am a democrat and admit Romney had a better showing. I don't give a flying fark if he had notes or not. Obama was flat and seemed indifferent. Obama has 2 more debates left to make up for it.

There's another video that shows him going back to the podium later and collecting all his papers before he leaves.Not that it's particularly suspicious, but we can't leave our crib notes on the podium, now can we?

OMGWTFBBQ!! he kept his notes?!! What more proof do we need!!! He was responsible for 9/11, he bombed Oklahoma city, and planned the attack on Pearl Harbor Via Infinito has found the evidence!!

// zero took his notes with him as well, but moon-bats won't point out that tidbit.

Is it a ludicrous accusation? Sure. But, after 4 years of "HEZ A SECKRIT MUZLIM FROM KINYA!!! WHARZ THE BIRF SURTIFIKIT? WHARZ THE COLLIDGE TRANSCRIPTS?" I'm just going to accept the Republican philosophy of "if a lie feels like it should be true, it's not a lie."

dericwater:Simple solution: overhead camera shots of both debaters' podiums (podia?). Footage of shots would not be broadcasted during the debate. Only used for post-debate analysis. Also, full body frisks for earpieces, transceivers, and other electronic devices.

turn the tables here. if Obama did the same thing, pulled something out of his pocket, and placed it on the podium. you would not be taking Obama's word for it that it wasn't notes. you'd be demanding CSI like enhancement of the video.

Yes I would. There isn't a chance in hell I'm voting for Romney. It's a goddamn handkerchief. Not everyone is so blindly partisan.

Wow. Whatever He pulled out of his pocket was closer to the color of his hand than the ha lie he wiped his nose with./Looked almost tan or a dull yellow and almost matches the hue of what was already on the podium.

Simple solution: overhead camera shots of both debaters' podiums (podia?). Footage of shots would not be broadcasted during the debate. Only used for post-debate analysis. Also, full body frisks for earpieces, transceivers, and other electronic devices.

turn the tables here. if Obama did the same thing, pulled something out of his pocket, and placed it on the podium. you would not be taking Obama's word for it that it wasn't notes. you'd be demanding CSI like enhancement of the video.

This may seem like a silly question, but why is it against the rules to bring notes? Granted, you don't want the whole debate to turn into a stump speech. But, you do want to keep your facts straight to counter certain arguments. (Or, in the case of RMoney, his bald-faced lies.)

ManateeGag:Via Infinito: Quasar: Is this like how Bush (or was it McCain) must have had an earpiece?

No this is more straight forward. He clearly took paper out of his pocket and put it on the podium.

There's another video that shows him going back to the podium later and collecting all his papers before he leaves.Not that it's particularly suspicious, but we can't leave our crib notes on the podium, now can we?

that's far from conclusive. the paper he picked up at the end looked a lot larger then what he pulled out in the beginning.

lennavan:No, subby I did not notice that because I saw Romney take notes many times. But even if the way you totally imagined the debate went were true, I fail to see how a handkerchief explains it.

Holy farking shiat you all need to drop this line of derp you're seriously as stupid as the far right derp right now.

They are being told Obama lost. Apparently this bothers them because they can't think for themselves, or realize that there is another debate on the 11th that will cause people to give even less of a fark about any of this than they already did.

We also did this shiat years ago with the Bush "earpiece" thing. Fark around

Interestingly enough, I more or less recieved indirect confimation that it was SOP for Bush and Rove to do an earpiece and microphone thing at most major speeches Bush gave. I knew a guy who is a "rigger" in Downtown DC and sets up lights/sound etc for most press conferences and televised speeches downtown. He told me flat out that the POTUS and his crew alway brought their own Camera that faced the crowd and fed to a montor Karl rove Watched and that he'd radio speech updates/alterations to Bush on the fly based on the crowd's reaction to what the president was saying